Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:03:43 -0900 (AKST) | From | "Mr. James W. Laferriere" <> | Subject | Re: Linux mdadm superblock question. |
| |
Hello Bill ,
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: >> On Sonntag 14 Februar 2010, you wrote: >>> In other words, 'auto-detection' for 1.x format devices is using an >>> initrd/initramfs. >> >> which makes 1.x format useless for everybody who does not want to deal with >> initrd/initramfs. > > You make this sound like some major big deal. are you running your own > distribution? In most cases mkinitrd does the right thing when you "make > install" the kernel, and if you are doing something in the build so complex > that it needs options, you really should understand the options and be sure > you're doing what you want. > > Generally this involves preloading a module or two, and if you need it every > time you probably should have built it in, anyway. > > My opinion... My Opinion as well . That is one of the many reasons why I have my '/' autoassemble . And do to this I am permanently stuck at 0.90 version of the raid table . No big shakes for that . But at sometime in the past there was a discussion to have the 0.90 raid table be removed , NOW THAT SCARES THE H?LL OUT OF ME . So far Neil has not done so .
I am unaware of any record from Neil or other maintainer(s) of the /md/ device tree saying that they will not remove the 0.90 table and the autoassembly functions there . I'd very much like to hear a statement saying there will not be a removal of the autoassembly functions for 0.90 raid table from the kernel tree .
Tia , JimL -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network&System Engineer | 3237 Holden Road | Give me Linux | | babydr@baby-dragons.com | Fairbanks, AK. 99709 | only on AXP | +------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |